Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjay @ Sanju vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 February, 2024
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 11394 of 2022
(SANJAY @ SANJU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 23-02-2024
Shri Nitin Vyas, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Gaurav Singh Chouhan, learned Dy. GA for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
Admit.
02. Heard o n I.A. No.4332/2023, which is first application filed under
Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail moved
on behalf of appellant - Sanjay @ Sanju.
03. Learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant under Sections 366
r/w 363 of the IPC, 376(3) r/w 376(2)(n) of the IPC r/w 5(1)6 of POCSO Act,
3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(w)(i) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and
sentenced to 5 years R.I. with fine for Rs.1,000/-, R.I. for life with fine of
Rs.5,000/-, R.I. for life with fine of Rs.5,000/-, 1 year R.I. with fine of Rs.500/-
and 1 year R.I. with fine of Rs.500 respectively with default stipulation.
04. As per the prosecution case, on 27.10.2018, the victim went for the
coaching but when she did not return from the coaching center her father
inquired it to the teacher of the coaching center and on that the teacher informed
to him that the victim has returned at 05:50 pm to her home. The search was
made by the parents and relatives. The FIR was lodged. During investigation,
the Police recovered the victim from the possession of the appellant on
09.11.2018. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and
arrested the appellant and after due investigation filed a charge sheet before the
trial Court for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 344, 376(3),
376(2)(n) and Section 5(L) r/w section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section
3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(V) and 3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Thereafter, appellant was tried before the trial Court and learned trial Court
convicted the appellant for the above offences.
05. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is
innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. The trial Court has
wrongly concluded the age of the victim. On the record, the Aadhar Card has
been produced and as per that she was major at the time of incident. As per the
statement of Dr. Hansa Patidar (PW-11), no any injury was found over the
body of the victim and she has also not opined that any rape was committed
with the victim. The appellant was 18 years old at the time of offense. He has
no previous criminal record. This appeal is of year 2022 and final hearing of this
appeal is not possible in near future, therefore, it is prayed that the substantial
jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he may be released on bail.
06. O n the other hand, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondent/State has opposed the application for suspension of sentence on the
ground that the learned trial Court has passed the detailed and speaking
judgment which deserves to be sustained by this Court, therefore, it is not a fit
case for enlarging the appellant on bail and suspending his jail sentence. Hence,
the application to suspend the substantial jail sentence be dismissed.
We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
07. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that
the appellant was released on bail during the trial, at the time of Crime he was 18
years of age and the final conclusion of this appeal will take considerable time,
we deem it fit to allow the application for suspension of jail sentence filed on
behalf of the appellant.
08. Accordingly, I.A. No.4332/2023 is allowed and it is directed that
subject to deposit of fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 23.09.2024 and on all other
subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this behalf, the execution
of substantial jail sentence imposed on the appellant Sanjay @ Sanju shall
remain suspended, till final disposal of this appeal.
List this matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
VS
